This story has been updated to clarify a dispute over House rules regarding disclosing subpoenaed documents.

A battle over the paper trail documenting the troubled building of the Obama administration’s online health insurance marketplace heated up on Friday as contractors declined to withhold some documents from congressional overseers and the lead investigating committee’s ranking Democrat accused his Republican counterpart of unfair dealing.

In a related move, Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee invoked House rules that they say bar Oversight Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., from publicly releasing any of the newly obtained contractor documents until after a special committee meeting to negotiate terms for the documents' release.

The Democrats' interpretation of the rules is disputed.

Democrats have accused Issa of selectively leaking sensitive documents to damage the White House in a manner that could endanger national security and invade Americans' privacy. They say the contractors' documents at issue could show hackers a path to pull consumer information out of HealthCare.gov's servers.

HHS said the agency had already shown the requested documents to committee members and staffers and that presenting them publicly would jeopardize exposing government technology secrets and citizens’ personal information.

On Friday, Issa released a letter from the contractor Creative Computing Solutions telling HHS it planned to turn over the requested documents and that it does not believe a contract clause precluding it from sharing documents with third parties applies to the oversight subpoena.

Later on Friday another HealthCare.gov contractor, MITRE, also agreed to turn over subpoenaed documents to the committee. The company said in a letter that it still believes documents should be transmitted through HHS but lawyers advised the company that it must comply with the subpoena. Issa claims the disputed documents reveal security vulnerabilities in HealthCare.gov that should have driven agency leaders to delay the marketplace’s Oct. 1 launch date.

“Americans should be disturbed that this administration is trying to stop government contractors from providing Congress with documents related to the decision to launch HealthCare.gov while known and serious security vulnerabilities were and still may be present,” Issa said in a statement. “CCSi’s analysis of the law is correct and its decision to comply protects its executives, investors, and customers from the risk of criminal prosecution for contempt of Congress.”

Cummings said Issa agreed to consult with him before issuing any subpoenas related to HealthCare.gov but then insisted on issuing the subpoenas while Cummings was in South Africa for Nelson Mandela’s funeral.

“Since you became chairman of the committee in 2011, you and your staff have engaged in a reckless pattern of leaking sensitive information and documents to promote political narratives that turn out to be inaccurate after further investigation,” Cummings wrote. “You have ignored repeated requests to consult first with committee members, law enforcement officials and agency experts to understand how your disclosures might harm our national interests.”

HealthCare.gov performed disastrously when it first launched, preventing the vast majority of insurance seekers from enrolling in plans through the site. The site gradually improved through November but only enrolled 137,000 people in insurance plans during its first two months. An additional 227,000 people enrolled in plans through state-run marketplaces.

The government hopes to enroll 7 million people in insurance plans through state and federal marketplaces by the end of March. Falling significantly short of that number could increase the level of risk in insurance pools, making premiums unsustainably expensive.

Officials say the site has been operating at an acceptable level with error rates lower than 1 percent and pages responding to customer clicks in less than 1 second since a self-imposed Nov. 30 deadline. During a massive repair process, officials instituted a new management structure, added servers, fixed more than 400 computer code errors and installed a queuing system to keep the site from becoming overburdened by high traffic.

FROM OUR SPONSORS

sponsored

JOIN THE DISCUSSION

By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or
otherwise objectionable. Although Nextgov does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has
no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to
be in violation of this rule.

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from Nextgov.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.